Friday, February 04, 2011

Hitler as Darwinian Word Made Flesh

Genuine religion is a defense against ideology of all forms; or, you might say that ideology is a reaction to religion, which is why the worst ideologies -- the ones that do real damage -- become pseudo-religions, drawing on religious energy and emotion to sustain themselves, all the while pretending to themselves that Spirit does not exist.

Genuine religion -- either consciously and explicitly or unconsciously and implicitly -- puts one in touch with first principles that define man qua Man, and allow one to understand the adage, as above, so below. This means that the archetypal Man (Adam Kadmon) is fashioned after the Absolute, and that the arc of our lives is (or should be) a movement toward greater conformity to that archetype.

False religions such as metaphysical Darwinism or Leftism always either obscure their first principles or fail to draw them out. As a result, they can't help lying, whether consciously or unconsciously. The dim or passive ones -- which is most of them -- lie unconsciously, whereas the bright ones do so consciously and disingenuously.

In fact, that is one of the difficulties in assessing a liberal. For example, Obama or Pelosi are so "cosmically ignorant" (as PowerLine put it) about economics, one necessarily wonders: do they actually believe what they say? In short, are they stupid or malevolent?

The Darwinist cannot or will not see the reality of "as above, so below." Not only does he deny it, but to the extent that Darwinism reveals the truth of man, then the reverse must be the case: as below, so above.

In other words, if Darwinism were true, then there is absolutely nothing -- not love, not truth, not art, not virtue -- that cannot be reduced to a battle down below for genetic survival. Translated to the field of politics, it is reduced to a brawl for power.

People say it is unfair to blame Darwin for social Darwinism, but to the extent that Darwinism reveals the "truth" of man, and this truth begins to take root on a widespread basis, only a rank hypocrite, weakling, or sentimentalist would fail to apply the doctrine to the conduct of his life. Besides, there can be no fairness or unfairness in Darwinism.

This is most certainly how Hitler felt about it. Furthermore, he was at least consistent and clear-sighted enough to know who the real enemy was: the religious, beginning with the devils who were responsible for the whole thing, the Jews. In order to apply his new anti-religious religion, he had to extirpate the old religion root and branch. Jews were the root. The branches would come later.

Even in a thoroughly trivial case such as Charles the Queeg, notice how this radical Darwinist has had to go about purging his blog of the religious. The underlying pattern is identical, again, because religion is the inoculation against bad or evil ideologies, so the battle against religion will always be at the front line of Cosmic War I, AKA the Forty Thousand Year War.

This is what groups such as the ACLU are all about, regardless of what they say they are about. Again, many of its members are just stupid, while others are disingenuous. But underneath it all, they know that in order to advance their infrahuman and anti-human agenda, they must eliminate the one force that would prevent it: religion.

Oddly enough, Hitler was actually more crafty and subtle than the ACLU. One of the things that marginalizes the ACLU in America is that they attack religion so brazenly. In Hitler's case, he knew that he had to progress in stages in order to gradually "Nazify" Christendom. If he had gone after Christianity more directly, more resistance would have arisen.

And he didn't even go after the Jews on the basis of religion per se. Rather, he first converted them to a race, again consistent with the principle of "as below, so above." In other words, their "evil" ideology could be reduced to a kind of genetic defect, and thus eliminated from the body of man. The pathology was not in our stars, but in the blood.

One author has defined fascism as the violent resistance to transcendence. From this angle, the ACLU is not fascist, since they engage in non-violent resistance to transcendence. And yet, the distinction is not so clear cut, since the ACLU wants to use the law to gain a monopoly on religion (the religion of materialism), and the law is always backed by state violence.

But at the same time, it's not as simple as saying that fascism is opposed to transcendence. Rather, it simply inverts it, so that transcendence will be sought from "below," in the emotions, instincts, and senses. What the Nazis sought was a kind of frenzied and irrational religion, or religion purged of any kind of hierarchical ascent. A large part of this necessarily involved a disabling of the conscience, which is to the individual what real religion is to the collective.

Hitler was well aware, for example, of how the Ten Commandments represented a very real barrier to what might be called "transcendence through descent." He wanted to breed a new "race" of ecstatically violent men who would have no such scruples -- authentic born-again pagans with no "impure" Jewish conscience to get in the way. In this inverted religion, man could be totally fulfilled here on earth by transcending individuality from below.

As Van Vrekhem writes, Hitler believed he "had been sent, and was constantly guided, to change the conscience and morality of man into something like the opposite of Christianity." This would be "a new system of values based on brutality and violence." Hitler actually saw Christ as his precursor, in that he would be the "link," so to speak, between the Volk and their most primitive instincts. Again, it was very much as if he were "word made flesh," except that in this case, the word was the primordial lie from below. Hitler said that,

"Providence has predestined me to be the greatest liberator of humanity.... I liberate man... from the foul and humiliating pangs of a chimera called 'conscience' and 'morality,' and from the demands of a liberty and personal independence of which anyway only a few are capable."

To the Christian teaching about the infinite value of the individual soul, "I oppose with icy clarity the liberating teaching of the nothingness and insignificance of the individual and his development within the concrete immortality of the nation." The Fuhrer would release "the mass of the believers from the burden of the free decision."

You see? Like nature herself, Hitler cared for the survival of the German species, not the individual. Like a multiculturalist, he believed that eternity was concretely located in the group's essence, not in the fanciful individual soul: "Hitler saw the human individual as nothing more than a cell in a body, an ant in a nest."

Hitler wrote that "the life of the individual should not be given such high value. A fly lays a million eggs, they all die. But flies survive." As Van Vrekhem notes, "the perspectives this opens reveal something of the real dimension of the evil to be discovered behind all the destruction and slaughter caused by this German Messiah."

At its very core, Hitler's vision was radically anti-Christian, anti-Enlightenment, anti-modernity, and anti-progress. His revolutionary goal was to create a "Spartan totalitarianism, in which people would be smiling, healthy, fanatical, and soulless robots, totally integrated into the common body of the Volk and disdaining individual dignity as a kind of psychological leprosy." This new man would place will above intellect (and certainly conscience).

Here again, this is the precise inversion of the religious man, for whom will is a prolongation of intellect, or "truth in action." But for the Nazi (or the metaphysically consistent Darwinist, for that matter), there can be no truth.

Rather, "truth" is just the prolongation of genetic will into the illusory area of the "mind." Truth is a function of power, as any good leftist knows. Thus, Hitler was in complete accord with your average de-Christianized leftist professor, that "the propaganda which produces the desired results is good and all other propaganda is bad."

*A reminder to the stupid: when I refer to "Darwinism," I am always talking about philosophical or metaphysical Darwinism, not the actual science. And before you get all sensitive and defensive, remember that the radical Darwinists such as Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris do not hesitate to call religion evil. I am merely responding in kind, for if one of these metaphysics is true, and you value Truth, then the other must inevitably be evil. Finally, it should go without saying that I am in no way suggesting that Hitler would have consciously regarded himself as a Darwinist, even though his perverse view of human life shares some of its most important assumptions.

I liberate man... from the foul and humiliating pangs of a chimera called 'conscience' and 'morality,' and from the demands of a liberty and personal independence of which anyway only a few are capable.

Ah, the primordial lie in all its foulness. This same mindset is the driving force behind virtually all leftist thought, even if they wouldn't put it so bluntly. How else to explain the destruction of boundaries, the hatred of traditional values, or Jersey Shore?

I have pondered while driving the icy roads: Given the limitless evil of the Nazi regime, the manifestation of the Shadow of the Germanic psyche, was there at any point a viable chance that this could have actually worked to its opposite effect - a Germany that manifested the Light? What a nation that would have been, considering the intellect and creativity on hand. Deitrich Bonhoeffer was an example of German spiritual genius, and he has his counterparts in German science (Einstein and others), psychology, and the arts. This was a highly advanced nation and it could have become a beacon among nations.

Was it all inevitable? Or was there a tipping point in which a post-war Germany, smarting from the Treaty of Versailles, allowed its collective ego to run amuck? Was there a point in which even Hitler - who did have his gifts - could have restrained his imperialistic inclinations?

I have to believe that just as individuals have choices, so do nations. The higher an individual climbs on the spiritual ladder, the more catastrophic the fall, should that come to be. So too, I think, was the case with Germany in the 20's and 30's.

"Rather, "truth" is just the prolongation of genetic will into the illusory area of the "mind." Truth is a function of power, as any good leftist knows. Thus, Hitler was in complete accord with your average de-Christianized leftist professor, that "the propaganda which produces the desired results is good and all other propaganda is bad.""

And it all rests upon,

You cannot know reality, All you can know is what others believe, and You are not capable of free will.

Given all of that, don't bother questioning what the polls say we believe, just submit and enjoy the ride for the greater good. Or die. Have a nice day.

Rick, I think you could say Hitler had his spiritual gifts, if you will - he meditated a lot, received "answers". And it worked for him, up til the time his ego overwhelmed him and whatever gifts he may have had.

"In other words, if Darwinism were true, then there is absolutely nothing -- not love, not truth, not art, not virtue -- that cannot be reduced to a battle down below for genetic survival. Translated to the field of politics, it is reduced to a brawl for power."

Will, thanks.Scary thought. Almost sounds as if he just happened to be in the right place at the wrong time...(and without a guide, maybe).Actual meditation? Or do you mean more like unconsciously spiritual contemplation. If the former, which religion?

Will said "Was it all inevitable? Or was there a tipping point in which a post-war Germany, smarting from the Treaty of Versailles, allowed its collective ego to run amuck?"

As big a proponent of Free Will as I am, Free Will can only do so much with individual choices. Against the tide of its unquestioned beliefs, it's nearly impotent, "It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters."... if you don't regard reality as real, truth and morality vanish with it, and neither will be there to grab onto to stop your slide into the abyss.

The tipping point for Germany was probably when Kant missed his famous clockwork afternoon walk to finish Rousseau's Emile (I know, I know, 'there he goes again...'). Could they have chosen differently? Sure, but they chose instead, one thinker after another, one classroom of thirsty ears after another, to believe in what told them they could believe what they wanted to believe, and after a century of reaffirming that belief, it was very nearly unavoidable.

If Hitler had experienced a moment of clarity and had had the will to rebel against all he believed... someone else would have stepped up. Maybe not as bad, maybe worse. He found such a willing and enthusiastic audience, because there were so many who believed the essence of what he did - like an audience who bursts into laughter before the punch line is delivered, anticipating it from the expression on the master comedian's face - or to toss it into the metaphor juicer, Hitler just happened to be the first competent conductor to pick up the baton... the orchestra was already well versed in the music, had the sheet music right before them, Nazism was just the style and tempo of the conductor at hand... it would have been the same tune no matter who led the band.

As Gagdad said, "a disabling of the conscience, which is to the individual what real religion is to the collective"... which is what makes all the wackademic oldies but goodies stations so hard to listen to today.

Yes, Brazentide, the ACLU's defense of religion is akin to the probably apocryphal assertion that "we have to destroy this village to save it". 0r GWB sadly real assertion that the free market could only be saved by government intervention.

I voted for Bush three times, but his statement reveals that he doesn't understand the meaning of "free market" -- not too surprising given that he was masterfully indoctrinated at the Harvard SoB. Similarly the indoctrination the lawyers of the ACLU received seems to keep them from grasping the meaning of the First Amendment in general and the Establishment Clause in particular.

So when the ACLU defended the right of Nazis to march in Skokie, and lost a good portion of their membership, was that also cover for their dastardly plans, or was it because (as this post seems to be implying) that they really are Nazi sympathizers? And how does that mesh with the fact that, as you'd expect from an organization of liberal lawyers, that its membership is heavily Jewish?

Again, it was very much as if he were "word made flesh," except that in this case, the word was the primordial lie from below.

When the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, Deity took on flesh to reveal Himself and be light in the darkness. Hitler and antichrists of our day deify flesh, preferring darkness. Any wonder they take away our incandescent bulbs?

...was there at any point a viable chance that this could have actually worked to its opposite effect - a Germany that manifested the Light?

While I don't know if there was ever a viable point, I can guess both the conditions and the terms that would have been necessary. Analogously to what happens within individuals, WWI and its outcome could have been a wakeup call, the sort of event that rocks your world but which, if accepted humbly as a learning opportunity, can serve as a vehicle for transcendence. The humility is the key, though, and I don't think the Germans at the time were ready or willing to be humble. They had been humiliated in defeat; instead of taking that as an opportunity for collective self-reflection, it spurred their collective ego into overdrive.

Rick, according to what I have read, Hitler actually meditated. There have been reports that some German occult-y group saw in Hitler a potentiality for embodying the spirit of the Volk and they encouraged him to meditate and bring this potentiality to the fore.

Sounds a bit ridiculous, but even the most secular of historians have trouble with accounting for the transformation of a dandied-up, second-rate artist, one who did not have the wherewithal to rise above the rank of corporal after 4 years of military service, into the reichsfurher of Germany 15 years later.

Julie, I tend to agree. Even all that energy that fueled German Romanticism and the dark gods of their pagan past could have been sublimated, I think, into the energy of transcendence.

In some manner, they were clearly on the way, what with their advances in science, theology, etc. Then Hitler stepped in, or should I say the Shadow of the collective speaking through Hitler stepped in. But traces of their advancement lingered, even after Hitler and his cronies took control.

Did you know their was a Nazi cooking tv show? That's right, the Germans had developed television before we did. Small in scale, of course, and available only to Party members, but yes - there was actually a nazi tv cooking show.

Van will now provide you with the sordid details of what that show must have been like.

It goes back to the interplay with the external conditions. We all know about the inflation in the Weimar Republic, but that whole system was set up to fail coming out of Versailles. The massive reparations debt imposed on Germany by primarily French vindictiveness -- not without some justification -- was the motive for devaluing the German currency. Inflation caused a great hardship on the population but given the massive burden of a debt that would not ever be paid without devaluation, it was likely viewed as the lesser of two evils.

Many Germans probably said, screw the French. Give them all worthless paper you can print. Occult stuff aside, Hitler was promising them a chance to rebuild their power, pride, and wealth. It's pretty appealing.

And you get to make the arrogant frogs lick your jackboots.

Substitute 'American' for 'German' and 'Chinese' for 'French' -- just imagine.

Will said "...even the most secular of historians have trouble with accounting for the transformation of a dandied-up, second-rate artist.." Yeah, but that's because most secular historians don't have a clue about glamour. They can easily point to a Bruce Springsteen on the stage mesmerizing 50,000 people for 4 hrs straight, authoritatively describe how this move and that sound accomplishes it... but they couldn't pick him out of the crowd if their lives depended on it.

"Van will now provide you with the sordid details of what that show must have been like. "

mushroom, also the Kaiser was removed, after which came the chaos of the Weimar Republic. Germans had no tradition with democracy and they no doubt yearned for the days of Kaiser stability. Hitler was, to an extent, an ersatz Kaiser.

I don't think his explains the (literally unholy) transformation of a rather drab, non-significant, failed artist into a figure of malevolent charisma.

The next thing I knew, the President of the United States had put his hand on my shoulder and was comforting me; telling me that he understood my loss and that he knew I had been trying to be strong and take care of all the family members of the crew; but that he could see I was suffering too.

I had voted for Reagan in both the '79 and '84 elections (it was the first time I had voted Republican instead of Libertarian), but it wasn't until that moment that I truly understood the personal power of the man; his genuine warmth and the depth of his concern for someone he didn't even know.

Wow - you had me going there for a second. As I read this, I started thinking "Maybe I don't understand this guy's viewpoint as well as I thought", and then I got to the closing paragraph and let out the breath I was holding.

As usual, you're right, and even about my fellow atheists, Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens. (I was moved, a few years ago, to write a post called "Sam Harris Doesn't Speak For Me".) So we're on the same page after all:

Van, secular historians deal with magnetic figures like Alex the Great, Napoleon, Charlemagne, so they have to acknowledge some kind of glamour at play. The question is: how do they account for an apparent non-entity's transformation into an Ubermensch? Hitler developed and used what charismatic power he had before the glamour of modern media came to abet his evil cause. He united all the warring nationalistic groups - which the other day I likened to someone uniting the crips, bloods, and latin kings under one banner and philosophy - and Hitler did this sans radio and tv. Whatever Hitler had been before 1920, he became something very different afterward.

It occurred to me that Hitler's transformation was also an aping of the Divine - Christ, too, was a "non-entity" out of a one-horse town, who, while coming into Divine Power, remained, in the earthly sense, a non-entity. His power is real, but of the invisible kingdom. Hitler's power was very visible, palpable, even sensuous. Hitler's demonic ego would have never settled for being a non-entity in the earthly sense.

some curious things re Aleister Crowley[which I beg everyone's pardon if 'OT'] [[may not be so far afield, in that if you poll average people as to who'd be among the 'evilest' figures of last century, you will surely hear "Hitler" and maybe Uncle Al too, alack...]]

to wit:He was incredibly well-read and -travelled and fluent in languages and expert in 'all' religions....he was equally-incredibly prolific....AND he is honoured by his fans with multiple collections online for free, of his entire oeuvre. That's devotion! --the likes of which you'd see for few other scribes --say Kerouac e.g. [except for lawyers & estates' interests]The man had some knack for legend-building/rep. making, rocking & rolling before any existed.Hemingway even includes a cameo in A MOVABLE FEAST; as did the Fab 4 on SGT PEPPERS cover

The pure lifelong celibate solar master Aivanhov felt AC's achilles heel was his sex magick practices---but gave him credit as a great Cabbalist.Another spiritual writer I love is Paul Brunton, who was a morty enemy of Crowley. He mentions the magician's name one time in his voluminous NOTEBOOKS: "AC died cursing and snarling"

my bottom line =That Bad Egg could sure write up an immortal storm!as Lucien Carr --Kerouac's good buddy-- said of Jack: He loved each word of the English language as much as I do my father!"

"For example, Obama or Pelosi are so "cosmically ignorant" (as PowerLine put it) about economics, one necessarily wonders: do they actually believe what they say? In short, are they stupid or malevolent?"

Since when is being prolific a virtue? And no I don't think Crowley rates as evil as Hitler, Stalin or Mao. Hell, Al Gore is more evil that Crowley...in effect. Crowley struck me as more of a useful idiot with delusions of grandeur. A wannabe who never had the influence or power he craved.

I thought you people were Constitution worshippers around here. The ACLU is one of the leading defenders of the Constitution (primarily the BIll of Rights), so I'm not sure why you aren't all putting your money where your mouth is. Join today!

I haven't been posting much here as of late, but you folks dear to me. Booger the Cat is dead. I found her torn to pieces in the back yard this morning. paw prints on the wall indicate a raccoon. Right now I'm just all fucked up. bad. I was altogether too fond of that cat.Fergus will show my best ol' buddy around her new digs.

The other day I saw Will post for the first time in quite a while, and I thought of him and Fergus. Coincidentally, that evening iOwntheworld posted a picture of a raccoon on its hind legs cradling a kitten in its forewpaws. Cute pic. The kitten looked a lot like Boogies, and I posted a quick link here saying something about best of all worlds- 'coons and cats together. For some odd reason February has always been the month in which bad shit goes down. Ever since 2/11/80, when my WV got totalled. My father died on 2/13/93 Last year at this time they put my mother in a convalescent hospital. We weren't sure if she'd make it, and this year she's quite ill again. Last week my computer took a shit. I've been fighting a gum infection, and the dentist wants to pull a couple molars. I've been busting my ass to try and get a permanent gig out the school where I've been an on call sub for the last going on five years now. I've been screwed over four times in the hiring, and next week I have to interview again. Right now I'm gut sick with the grief. It's tempting to see omens, and evil cosmic forces at work. At this moment it's hard to even pray. I just have to get some of this out.

Prayed for you JWM. I always appreciate very much your posts. Even looked for them here and there, especially when in need of a bit of perspective and encouragement or just something good to read. Thanks.

-Crowley an idiot? Better get the word to Jimmy Page and Kenneth Anger...Hubbard a buffoony douche? We'll notify Chick and Bart Simpson pronto! "Hubbard was a great artist himself. One way to learn about Scientology is to know who Ron Hubbard was. He was a great man." -C Corea

It seems to me that the Left greatly fears any kind of moral clarity. And so they exploit an ambiguous indicator: Moral Certainty, by which I mean here not the usual certainty-sufficient-to-a-decision-on-moral-grounds, but unshakeable assuredness of moral matters. Moral clarity often brings moral certainty, or something close to it. But great and grievous error also engenders moral certainty.

And so the Left takes any moral clarity on the Right as an indication of great and grievous error (which it labels EVIL, because it can, and cares only about how people will act on a word and not on their right to the truth), while defending their own moral certainty as the product of transcendent moral clarity.

But somehow they confuse transgression with transcendence. Someone should shake them and ask "what do you mean by 'transgression'?" And then shout to the world (for the Heavens already know) "'Transgression' means breaking rules without regard for whether those rules are valid. It means violating the rights of others and doing things that we long ago decided were bad, without regard for the Law of Unintended Consequences. It means wreaking without rekoning, raised to a virtue. It is a violation of that first Cardinal Virtue, Practical Wisdom. It is not flirting, but courting damnation!"

Thank you all so very much. The DSL took a crap yesterday, and it just now came back on line. I haven't been posting much here, and I feel kind of out of the loop.Nonetheless, as I said yesterday, you all are dear to me even though we've never seen one another.I learned something new. Grief shows us the full measure of our love. It is terrifying in its scale. Yet we must continue to invest our love in our families, in our friends, and in the small but precious souls of our pets. It is what makes us alive. Withholding our love severs us from life, and spirit. Will, Ben Julie, Bob, Anna, Van- Thank you very very much.John M

Grief shows us the full measure of our love. It is terrifying in its scale. Yet we must continue to invest our love in our families, in our friends, and in the small but precious souls of our pets. It is what makes us alive. Withholding our love severs us from life, and spirit.

That is so lovely and so true, I thought it bore repeating. Thank you, John.

What About Bob?

Who spirals down the celestial firepole on wings of slack, seizes the wheel of the cosmic bus, and embarks upin a bewilderness adventure of higher nondoodling? Who, haloed be his gnome, loiters on the threshold of the transdimensional doorway, looking for handouts from Petey? Who, with his doppelgägster and testy snideprick, Cousin Dupree, wields the pliers and blowtorch of fine insultainment for the ridicure of assouls? Who is the gentleman loaffeur who yoinks the sword from the stoned philosopher and shoves it in the breadbasket of metaphysical ignorance and tenure? Whose New Testavus for the Restavus blows the locked doors of the empyrean off their rusty old hinges and sheds a beam of intense darkness on the world enigma? Who is the Biggest Fakir of the Vertical Church of God Knows What, channeling the roaring torrent of 〇 into the feeble stream of cyberspace? Who is the masked pandit who lobs the first water balloon out the motel window at the annual Raccoon convention? Who is your nonlocal partner in disorganized crimethink? Shut your mouth! But I'm talkin' about bʘb! Then we can dig it!